US GDP rises 5.7%, but corporations aren't hiring

[Big Fitz]

The Marshall Plan certainly helped out post World War II Europe.

Actually the Deming plan was far better. The Marshall Plan was fairly wasteful, inefficient and redundant IIRC. Deming taught Japan how to rebuild themselves, till they became the powerhouse in the 1980's on the backs electronics and automotive quality and efficiency. The Marshall plan created a lot of dependancy that should have been avoided.

 

[Big Fitz]

The Manhattan Project definitely accomplished what it set out to do, though many people might disagree that the net result was beneficial.

Those people are reactionary morons. We could have essentially unlimited global electrical power from this method of energy generation for a few centuries if we went to wide spread use.

But nnoooOOOOooooo the freezniks and environazis are scared to death of anything that would increase comfort and viability of human progress. They claim it's for public safety, but the last 30 years have proven to most rational people, it's political.

 

[Vast LWC]

The Manhattan Project definitely accomplished what it set out to do, though many people might disagree that the net result was beneficial.

Those people are reactionary morons. We could have essentially unlimited global electrical power from this method of energy generation for a few centuries if we went to wide spread use.

But nnoooOOOOooooo the freezniks and environazis are scared to death of anything that would increase comfort and viability of human progress. They claim it's for public safety, but the last 30 years have proven to most rational people, it's political.

Agreed. I've never been an anti-nuke type.

 

[Vast LWC]

The Marshall Plan certainly helped out post World War II Europe.

Actually the Deming plan was far better. The Marshall Plan was fairly wasteful, inefficient and redundant IIRC. Deming taught Japan how to rebuild themselves, till they became the powerhouse in the 1980's on the backs electronics and automotive quality and efficiency. The Marshall plan created a lot of dependancy that should have been avoided.

This is a decent point.

Of course I would point out that Japan needed quite a bit of government help at the start of their recovery, before Deming's training could even begin to pay off.

Also, though Europe is today more of a Socialist society, they are doing quite well economically.

 

[editec]

Well, the GDP rose by 5.7% which is a continuation of a trend of rising GDP, so the stimulus and other economic policies appear to be helping a bit:

U.S. GDP grows at 5.7% rate in fourth quarter - latimes.com

The nation's total production of goods and services expanded at a heady 5.7% annual rate in the final three months of last year, the Commerce Department said Friday in its first estimate of the quarter's gross domestic product.

But unemployment continues to be dismal.

What's the reason? US Companies keep sending their jobs overseas, to save money, thanks to reliance on market self-governance.

So the corporations reap record profits, Wall Street continues to climb, and US citizens continue to have no jobs.

So what's the solution? Obama believes it's giving tax breaks to companies that keep their jobs in the US. I say that's a good start.

Anyone have any other good ideas to keep jobs here?

Yeah...rethink our FREE TRADE policies.

STupid idea to begin with in my opinion...and FYI contrary to the Libertarian propaganda many of you have so obviously fallen for, that is ALSO the opinion of Adam Smith.

<H2>Of Restraints upon the Importation from Foreign Countries of such Goods as can be Produced at Home

IV.2.1

By restraining, either by high duties or by absolute prohibitions, the importation of such goods from foreign countries as can be produced at home, the monopoly of the home market is more or less secured to the domestic industry employed in producing them.

Thus the prohibition of importing either live cattle*32 or salt provisions from foreign countries secures to the graziers of Great Britain the monopoly of the home market for butcher's meat.

The high duties upon the importation of corn,*33 which in times of moderate plenty amount to a prohibition, give a like advantage to the growers of that commodity.

The prohibition of the importation of foreign woollens is equally favourable to the woollen manufacturers.*34 The silk manufacture, though altogether employed upon foreign materials, has lately obtained the same advantage.*35 The linen manufacture has not yet obtained it, but is making great strides towards it.*36

Many other sorts of manufacturers*37 have, in the same manner, obtained in Great Britain, either altogether or very nearly, a monopoly against their countrymen. The variety of goods of which the importation into Great Britain is prohibited, either absolutely, or under certain circumstances, greatly exceeds what can easily be suspected by those who are not well acquainted with the laws of the customs.*38

</H2>
source

What ADAM SMITH was telling his country men, was NOT that FREE TRADE should be blindly and foolishly imposed as law,

Rather that, when facing a real natural advantage in producing SOME AGRICULTURAL GOODS (like cork and Medira wine) it behooves the nation NOT TO artificially try to create those home industries by imposing pointless tariffs.

I do so wish more people who THINK they understand this guy's point, actually read WEALTH OF NATIONS.

It's a hell of a lot more subtelly dealing with the issue of international economics than most libertarians seem to think it is.

ADAM SMITH was not an unthinking FREE TRADER, for goodness sakes.

He was PRAGMATIST who understood that nations needed to protect and encourage ONLY those industries where the nation could NOT EASILY produce their own goods. (Again, like cork or madera wine in Britian)

FYI this nation raised enormous protective tariffs and kept them in place for nearly 200 years.

And that is exactly why this nation became the welathy and powerful industrial nation it is.

FYI, the FEDERAL goverment used to run almost EXCLUSIVELY on the revenues garnered from TARIFFS.

FREE TRADE is the root source of the economic woes we're facing right now.

Because of it the middle class incomes did not keep up with the raising price of real estate.

Hence, the banks invented a system to continue lending when it was not sensible to do so.

Ergo, when the price of real estate started to realign itself with the real incomes of the people, the entire banking system went into panic mode.

I hope those of you who benefitting from the decline in real incomes, you union haters and blind-faith free traders, socked away enough to get through these hard times.

Because the trade policy chickens have come home to roost, and they're crapping all over our economy now, thanks to decades of stupid FREE TRADE agreements.

 

[Vast LWC]

Yeah...rethink our FREE TRADE policies.

STupid idea to begin with in my opinion...and FYI contrary to the Libertarian propaganda many of you have so obviously fallen for, that is ALSO the opinion of Adam Smith.

source

What ADAM SMITH was telling his country men, was NOT that FREE TRADE should be blindly and foolishly imposed as law,

Rather that, when facing a real natural advantage in producing SOME AGRICULTURAL GOODS (like cork and Medira wine) it behooves the nation NOT TO artificially try to create those home industries by imposing pointless tariffs.

I do so wish more people who THINK they understand this guy's point, actually read WEALTH OF NATIONS.

It's a hell of a lot more subtelly dealing with the issue of international economics than most libertarians seem to think it is.

ADAM SMITH was not an unthinking FREE TRADER, for goodness sakes.

He was PRAGMATIST who understood that nations needed to protect and encourage ONLY those industries where the nation could produce their own goods.

FYI this nation raised enormous protective tariffs and kept them in place for nearly 200 years.

And that is exactly why this nation became the welathy and powerful industrial nation it is.

FYI, the FEDERAL goverment used to run almost EXCLUSIVELY on the revenues garnered from TARIFFS.

FREE TRADE is the root source of the economic woes we're facing right now.

Because of it the middle class incomes did not keep up with the raising price of real estate.

Hence the banks invented a system to continue lending when it was not sensible to do so.

Hence, when the price of real estate started to realign itself with the real incomes of the people, the entire banking system went into panic mode.

I hope those of you who benefitting from the decline in real incomes, you union haters and free traders, socked away enough to get through these hard times.

Because the chickens have come home to roost and they're crapping all over our economy now, thanks to stupid FREE TRADE agreements.

OK, first of all, Adam Smith, while a revolutionary for his time, and the grandfather of free trade thought, has been dead for centuries now. Economic theory has moved on since then, in case you haven't noticed. And during that time, world economic conditions have changed quite a bit.

Secondly, if other countries, like China, are waging an undeclared trade war against us, then we have to respond, or we will suffer as a result.

 

[editec]

Yeah...rethink our FREE TRADE policies.

STupid idea to begin with in my opinion...and FYI contrary to the Libertarian propaganda many of you have so obviously fallen for, that is ALSO the opinion of Adam Smith.

source

What ADAM SMITH was telling his country men, was NOT that FREE TRADE should be blindly and foolishly imposed as law,

Rather that, when facing a real natural advantage in producing SOME AGRICULTURAL GOODS (like cork and Medira wine) it behooves the nation NOT TO artificially try to create those home industries by imposing pointless tariffs.

I do so wish more people who THINK they understand this guy's point, actually read WEALTH OF NATIONS.

It's a hell of a lot more subtelly dealing with the issue of international economics than most libertarians seem to think it is.

ADAM SMITH was not an unthinking FREE TRADER, for goodness sakes.

He was PRAGMATIST who understood that nations needed to protect and encourage ONLY those industries where the nation could produce their own goods.

FYI this nation raised enormous protective tariffs and kept them in place for nearly 200 years.

And that is exactly why this nation became the welathy and powerful industrial nation it is.

FYI, the FEDERAL goverment used to run almost EXCLUSIVELY on the revenues garnered from TARIFFS.

FREE TRADE is the root source of the economic woes we're facing right now.

Because of it the middle class incomes did not keep up with the raising price of real estate.

Hence the banks invented a system to continue lending when it was not sensible to do so.

Hence, when the price of real estate started to realign itself with the real incomes of the people, the entire banking system went into panic mode.

I hope those of you who benefitting from the decline in real incomes, you union haters and free traders, socked away enough to get through these hard times.

Because the chickens have come home to roost and they're crapping all over our economy now, thanks to stupid FREE TRADE agreements.

OK, first of all, Adam Smith, while a revolutionary for his time, and the grandfather of free trade thought, has been dead for centuries now. Economic theory has moved on since then, in case you haven't noticed. And during that time, world economic conditions have changed quite a bit.

Secondly, if other countries, like China, are waging an undeclared trade war against us, then we have to respond, or we will suffer as a result.

Yeah, I have noticed.

Another good reason to point out the flawed thinking of libertarians and extreme conservatives who claim they are literalists when interpreting the constiution.

What was sage advice 200 years ago, both economically and politically, is not necessarily sage advice today.

But my point was mostly just to show us that contrary to the commonly held myth that ADAM SMITH was an unthinking free trader, he was in fact quite subtle about how an economy and its trade policies should be designed.

 

[Vast LWC]

Yeah, I have noticed.

Another good reason to point out the flawed thinking of libertarians and extreme conservatives who claim they are literalists when interpreting the constiution.

What was sage advice 200 years ago, both economically and politically, is not necessarily sage advice today.

But my point was mostly just to show us that contrary to the commonly held myth that ADAM SMITH was an unthinking free trader, he was in fact quite subtle about how an economy and its trade policies should be designed.

Ahh, honestly I misinterpreted your intent there. In that context, good post .

 

[editec]

Yeah, I have noticed.

Another good reason to point out the flawed thinking of libertarians and extreme conservatives who claim they are literalists when interpreting the constiution.

What was sage advice 200 years ago, both economically and politically, is not necessarily sage advice today.

But my point was mostly just to show us that contrary to the commonly held myth that ADAM SMITH was an unthinking free trader, he was in fact quite subtle about how an economy and its trade policies should be designed.

Ahh, honestly I misinterpreted your intent there. In that context, good post .

No problem Vast. It's not possible to say it all in one post. Complex problems being what they are, what might make sense to do in one scene, is a completely assinine policy in another.

Sadly, in this melieux, people become so enamoured to their ideological fixations, that they forget that no economic policy or goverment policies is ALWAYS the right thing to do.

There is a time to reap and a time to sow, if you get my drift.

 

[Vast LWC]

Yeah, I have noticed.

Another good reason to point out the flawed thinking of libertarians and extreme conservatives who claim they are literalists when interpreting the constiution.

What was sage advice 200 years ago, both economically and politically, is not necessarily sage advice today.

But my point was mostly just to show us that contrary to the commonly held myth that ADAM SMITH was an unthinking free trader, he was in fact quite subtle about how an economy and its trade policies should be designed.

Ahh, honestly I misinterpreted your intent there. In that context, good post .

No problem Vast.

Ssdly, in this melieux, people become so enamoured to their ideological fixations, that they forget that no economic policy or goverment policies is ALWAYS the right thing to do.

There is a time to reap and a time to sow, if you get my drift.

Indeed, My bad completely for only skimming the post before responding.

BAD VAST!

 

[Big Fitz]

The Marshall Plan certainly helped out post World War II Europe.

Actually the Deming plan was far better. The Marshall Plan was fairly wasteful, inefficient and redundant IIRC. Deming taught Japan how to rebuild themselves, till they became the powerhouse in the 1980's on the backs electronics and automotive quality and efficiency. The Marshall plan created a lot of dependancy that should have been avoided.

This is a decent point.

Of course I would point out that Japan needed quite a bit of government help at the start of their recovery, before Deming's training could even begin to pay off.

Also, though Europe is today more of a Socialist society, they are doing quite well economically.

Economically as a nation, you are right on. They are doing pretty well.

Where I would disagree is in equating that with quality of life for the average citizen. They do not have the same ability to access electronics and labor saving devices. I won't get into cars and transportation, because really comparing Europe to North American is kinda not equivalent. They both have their special needs.

And of course, after that it's all flavor text and lifestyle choices. But essentially, yes. You're correct.

 

[Big Fitz]

FYI, the FEDERAL goverment used to run almost EXCLUSIVELY on the revenues garnered from TARIFFS.

We need to get back to this. Not totally, but over half. But that also requires spending cuts. I'm working on a theory of what I'm desiring to see, and have to post it sometime soon.

 

[Big Fitz]

OK, first of all, Adam Smith, while a revolutionary for his time, and the grandfather of free trade thought, has been dead for centuries now. Economic theory has moved on since then, in case you haven't noticed. And during that time, world economic conditions have changed quite a bit.

Secondly, if other countries, like China, are waging an undeclared trade war against us, then we have to respond, or we will suffer as a result.

True true. Economic theory has moved on and grown. But, like every physicist knows and uses Newton's work, every economist should know and use the foundational ideas of Adam Smith.

 

[Vast LWC]

You know, it's nice to have a good, mostly non-confrontational, discussion about this.

We find that there's many things we actually agree on when that happens. LOL.

 

[Big Fitz]

You know, it's nice to have a good, mostly non-confrontational, discussion about this.

We find that there's many things we actually agree on when that happens. LOL.

How totally weird! Here. Has a keetom who is almost relevant to this observation.

 

[Vast LWC]

you know, it's nice to have a good, mostly non-confrontational, discussion about this.

We find that there's many things we actually agree on when that happens. Lol.

how totally weird! Here. Has a keetom who is almost relevant to this observation.

rofl.

 

[Toro]

I got around to reading the BEA press release. This is what I found most interesting.

Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 0.1 percent
in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 8.0 percent in the third. National defense decreased
3.5 percent, in contrast to an increase of 8.4 percent. Nondefense increased 8.1 percent, compared with
an increase of 7.0 percent. Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment decreased 0.3 percent, compared with a decrease of 0.6 percent.

News Release: Gross Domestic Product

In other words, net government spending contributed zero to economic growth in the quarter. It was all driven by inventory rebuild, consumer spending and capital expenditures by corporations.

 

[Vast LWC]

I got around to reading the BEA press release. This is what I found most interesting.

Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 0.1 percent
in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 8.0 percent in the third. National defense decreased
3.5 percent, in contrast to an increase of 8.4 percent. Nondefense increased 8.1 percent, compared with
an increase of 7.0 percent. Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment decreased 0.3 percent, compared with a decrease of 0.6 percent.

News Release: Gross Domestic Product

In other words, net government spending contributed zero to economic growth in the quarter. It was all driven by inventory rebuild, consumer spending and capital expenditures by corporations.

Wow, that appears to be good news to me. Thanks for the info.

 

[code1211]

The Marshall Plan certainly helped out post World War II Europe.

Actually the Deming plan was far better. The Marshall Plan was fairly wasteful, inefficient and redundant IIRC. Deming taught Japan how to rebuild themselves, till they became the powerhouse in the 1980's on the backs electronics and automotive quality and efficiency. The Marshall plan created a lot of dependancy that should have been avoided.

I wonder how much this "Big Brother" approach contibuted toward the Socialist tendencies of Europe of today...

 

[code1211]

Well, the GDP rose by 5.7% which is a continuation of a trend of rising GDP, so the stimulus and other economic policies appear to be helping a bit:

U.S. GDP grows at 5.7% rate in fourth quarter - latimes.com

The nation's total production of goods and services expanded at a heady 5.7% annual rate in the final three months of last year, the Commerce Department said Friday in its first estimate of the quarter's gross domestic product.

But unemployment continues to be dismal.

What's the reason? US Companies keep sending their jobs overseas, to save money, thanks to reliance on market self-governance.

So the corporations reap record profits, Wall Street continues to climb, and US citizens continue to have no jobs.

So what's the solution? Obama believes it's giving tax breaks to companies that keep their jobs in the US. I say that's a good start.

Anyone have any other good ideas to keep jobs here?

Yeah...rethink our FREE TRADE policies.

STupid idea to begin with in my opinion...and FYI contrary to the Libertarian propaganda many of you have so obviously fallen for, that is ALSO the opinion of Adam Smith.

<H2>Of Restraints upon the Importation from Foreign Countries of such Goods as can be Produced at Home

IV.2.1

By restraining, either by high duties or by absolute prohibitions, the importation of such goods from foreign countries as can be produced at home, the monopoly of the home market is more or less secured to the domestic industry employed in producing them.

Thus the prohibition of importing either live cattle*32 or salt provisions from foreign countries secures to the graziers of Great Britain the monopoly of the home market for butcher's meat.

The high duties upon the importation of corn,*33 which in times of moderate plenty amount to a prohibition, give a like advantage to the growers of that commodity.

The prohibition of the importation of foreign woollens is equally favourable to the woollen manufacturers.*34 The silk manufacture, though altogether employed upon foreign materials, has lately obtained the same advantage.*35 The linen manufacture has not yet obtained it, but is making great strides towards it.*36

Many other sorts of manufacturers*37 have, in the same manner, obtained in Great Britain, either altogether or very nearly, a monopoly against their countrymen. The variety of goods of which the importation into Great Britain is prohibited, either absolutely, or under certain circumstances, greatly exceeds what can easily be suspected by those who are not well acquainted with the laws of the customs.*38

</H2>
source

What ADAM SMITH was telling his country men, was NOT that FREE TRADE should be blindly and foolishly imposed as law,

Rather that, when facing a real natural advantage in producing SOME AGRICULTURAL GOODS (like cork and Medira wine) it behooves the nation NOT TO artificially try to create those home industries by imposing pointless tariffs.

I do so wish more people who THINK they understand this guy's point, actually read WEALTH OF NATIONS.

It's a hell of a lot more subtelly dealing with the issue of international economics than most libertarians seem to think it is.

ADAM SMITH was not an unthinking FREE TRADER, for goodness sakes.

He was PRAGMATIST who understood that nations needed to protect and encourage ONLY those industries where the nation could NOT EASILY produce their own goods. (Again, like cork or madera wine in Britian)

FYI this nation raised enormous protective tariffs and kept them in place for nearly 200 years.

And that is exactly why this nation became the welathy and powerful industrial nation it is.

FYI, the FEDERAL goverment used to run almost EXCLUSIVELY on the revenues garnered from TARIFFS.

FREE TRADE is the root source of the economic woes we're facing right now.

Because of it the middle class incomes did not keep up with the raising price of real estate.

Hence, the banks invented a system to continue lending when it was not sensible to do so.

Ergo, when the price of real estate started to realign itself with the real incomes of the people, the entire banking system went into panic mode.
I hope those of you who benefitting from the decline in real incomes, you union haters and blind-faith free traders, socked away enough to get through these hard times.

Because the trade policy chickens have come home to roost, and they're crapping all over our economy now, thanks to decades of stupid FREE TRADE agreements.

Wow! When questioned on military strategy by an info babe who couched the question in the prevailing wisdom of the day, a general (retired) began his response with the words,"That's a load of crap!" I'm not sure why, but that interview came to mind when i read your post.

You say that Free Trade caused incomes to fall and apparently caused real estate prices to rise which caused the banks to lend more and led to the fall of the banking system. This train of logic has the engine in the middle.

Free Trade, as you imagine it, does not exist. It's heavily regulated and can be cut off or expanded at any time.

The quality of goods is a definable thing. Is it pretty? Durable? Ergonomic? Stylish?

The value of a thing (cost in relation to benefit) is less quantifiable, but can be "set" by sales records. If the Taurus outsells the Camry, the Taurus is probably a better value.

Trade allows the expansion of the number of things from which we choose to purchase those things that we need or want. More choices will usually expand quality in all directions. One of these directions is up. If the only way to safeguard "our jobs" is to limit our choices, that means we are choosing to reduce our upper end quality and reduce the value of those things that we purchase.

Citing Tarriffs as the ony way to save "our jobs" is conceeding that we can only mange to produce junk.

The rising real estate prices occurred because our lawmakers from both parties tampered with the banking system's lending procedures allowing loans to be issued to people who could not qualify to recieve them. This created a growing group of buyers competing to buy a stable group of properties.

Demand was greater than supply. The price of the proerties on the market rose as the demand continued to increase for 30 years.

When the people who could not afford to pay back the loans did not pay back the loans, the "Sub Prime" burrowers, banks were left with "Toxic assets".

The toxic assets were worthless and the loan portfolios had plenty of cost but no value. Audits revealed this. The system collapsed.

The collapse was caused not by free trade, but by government tampering with free trade.

You now suggest further tampering with free trade to correct the tampering previously shown to be the cause. You propose treating asfixiation with a noose.

The simple truth is that the world is our market and our workers must compete in that market. We will prosper or perish. There is a natural selection process that ends species and an economic selection process that ends economies.

By choosing to cling to a bygone notion that is not supported by real world evidence, you are proposing to condemn us to extinction as an ecomomic power. You are proposing that we strive to become a footnote in history. You are proposing a future of fear, a future of surrender and a future of ever diminishing prosperity.

I don't like your proposals.